Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Proof that GOD/God exists - Part 1

Brad_Watson.Miami
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2014 5:27:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
GOD: the 'system as a whole'/the 'universal quantum computer'.
The world's leading quantum computer scientists (like Dr. Seth Lloyd of MIT author of Programming the Universe) have discovered that "This universe behaves as a quantum computer where particles not only collide, they compute... Information can be created but not destroyed, although it can be transferred."

Where there's a computer, there are programs.
Where there's programs, there are programmers.
Where there's programmers, there's an original and number 1 programmer...

God incarnate (ET in the Guardin' of Eden, Jesus son of Joseph, 2nd Coming of the Christ): the original and number 1 programmer / the Creator of all true Earth-like plan-its.

Reincarnation being recently proven by science (google that) must also be dismissed by atheists since they don't believe in any afterlife. Yet, I've seen many atheists at least listen to reincarnation data, i.e. the book Soul Survivor. Everyone would like to think that they will carry on somehow after this body dies.
GOD=7_4, 7/4=July 4th or 7 April 30 AD: Good(7__4) Friday(74) when Jesus(74=J10+E5+S19+U21+S19) was nailed on(74) the Cross(74=C3+R18+O15+S19+S19).

GOD=7_4 algorithm/code produces Earth's 7 continents & 4 seasons, 4 lunar phases of 7 days (~7.4 days) each, Venus .7 AU & Mercury .4 AU, etc.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2014 5:32:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/2/2014 5:27:07 PM, Brad_Watson.Miami wrote:
GOD: the 'system as a whole'/the 'universal quantum computer'.
The world's leading quantum computer scientists (like Dr. Seth Lloyd of MIT author of Programming the Universe) have discovered that "This universe behaves as a quantum computer where particles not only collide, they compute... Information can be created but not destroyed, although it can be transferred."

Where there's a computer, there are programs.
Where there's programs, there are programmers.
Where there's programmers, there's an original and number 1 programmer...

God incarnate (ET in the Guardin' of Eden, Jesus son of Joseph, 2nd Coming of the Christ): the original and number 1 programmer / the Creator of all true Earth-like plan-its.

Reincarnation being recently proven by science (google that) must also be dismissed by atheists since they don't believe in any afterlife. Yet, I've seen many atheists at least listen to reincarnation data, i.e. the book Soul Survivor. Everyone would like to think that they will carry on somehow after this body dies.

Please separate euphemisms from the actual descriptions of what things are. Program's presuppose that it was consciously programmed, hence the same description cannot be readily applied to the universe.

Note that the natural laws are descriptive and not proscriptive, including our laws of information conservation, etc.
Brad_Watson.Miami
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2014 5:56:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/2/2014 5:32:51 PM, Envisage wrote::
Please separate euphemisms from the actual descriptions of what things are. Program's presuppose that it was consciously programmed, hence the same description cannot be readily applied to the universe.

Note that the natural laws are descriptive and not proscriptive, including our laws of information conservation, etc.:

Envisage,

Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer': GOD. You didn't argue that. 40 years ago, scientists were saying, "Everything is energy." For the last 10 years, scientists are saying*, "Everything is information."

You are correct, "programs mean there is conscious decisions going on". You want to ignore the real programs because the proposition of there being decisions, design** and only the "appearance of randomness" destroys atheism and Darwinian evolution. We're left with GOD/God.

"God is Good", GOD=GOOD. It's a math equation.

.
*Synchronism: 7/2/14 18:47 "It's simple physics" - ad for Celebrex **18:51 "That's not a coincidence." ad on ABC
GOD=7_4, 7/4=July 4th or 7 April 30 AD: Good(7__4) Friday(74) when Jesus(74=J10+E5+S19+U21+S19) was nailed on(74) the Cross(74=C3+R18+O15+S19+S19).

GOD=7_4 algorithm/code produces Earth's 7 continents & 4 seasons, 4 lunar phases of 7 days (~7.4 days) each, Venus .7 AU & Mercury .4 AU, etc.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2014 6:52:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/2/2014 5:56:35 PM, Brad_Watson.Miami wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:32:51 PM, Envisage wrote::
Please separate euphemisms from the actual descriptions of what things are. Program's presuppose that it was consciously programmed, hence the same description cannot be readily applied to the universe.

Note that the natural laws are descriptive and not proscriptive, including our laws of information conservation, etc.:

Envisage,

Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer': GOD. You didn't argue that. 40 years ago, scientists were saying, "Everything is energy." For the last 10 years, scientists are saying*, "Everything is information."

The equivocations here are nauseous...

You are correct, "programs mean there is conscious decisions going on".

Unless we accept your equivocation.

You want to ignore the real programs because the proposition of there being decisions, design** and only the "appearance of randomness" destroys atheism and Darwinian evolution. We're left with GOD/God.

What on earth does Darwinian evolution have to do with quantum computing?

It's when I see random stuff like this thrown in that I start to take people less seriously.

"God is Good", GOD=GOOD. It's a math equation.

.
*Synchronism: 7/2/14 18:47 "It's simple physics" - ad for Celebrex **18:51 "That's not a coincidence." ad on ABC
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/6/2014 4:04:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/2/2014 5:56:35 PM, Brad_Watson.Miami wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:32:51 PM, Envisage wrote::
Please separate euphemisms from the actual descriptions of what things are. Program's presuppose that it was consciously programmed, hence the same description cannot be readily applied to the universe.

Note that the natural laws are descriptive and not proscriptive, including our laws of information conservation, etc.:

Envisage,

Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer': GOD. You didn't argue that. 40 years ago, scientists were saying, "Everything is energy." For the last 10 years, scientists are saying*, "Everything is information."

You are correct, "programs mean there is conscious decisions going on". You want to ignore the real programs because the proposition of there being decisions, design** and only the "appearance of randomness" destroys atheism and Darwinian evolution. We're left with GOD/God.

Taking your word on everything you have said, the only thing you have proven is that the universe acts similar to a computer. That does not in any way prove that there is some intelligent being out there controlling it.

The entire argument for intelligent design is nonsense. The only reason you know that a computer program needs a programmer is because every program you have ever seen had a programmer, and you have never seen a program without one. The same idea applies to buildings, paintings, or whatever other examples theists cling too. Your understanding of reality comes from your experiences and your ability to compare and contrast. You compare buildings and paintings with nature, and reasonably conclude that nature doesn't produce them. You can't do that with a designed vs. an undersigned universe because you only have one universe. There is nothing to compare and contrast it to. Without that all you have is baseless speculation grounded in wishful thinking.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 10:37:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/6/2014 4:04:20 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:56:35 PM, Brad_Watson.Miami wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:32:51 PM, Envisage wrote::
Please separate euphemisms from the actual descriptions of what things are. Program's presuppose that it was consciously programmed, hence the same description cannot be readily applied to the universe.

Note that the natural laws are descriptive and not proscriptive, including our laws of information conservation, etc.:

Envisage,

Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer': GOD. You didn't argue that. 40 years ago, scientists were saying, "Everything is energy." For the last 10 years, scientists are saying*, "Everything is information."

You are correct, "programs mean there is conscious decisions going on". You want to ignore the real programs because the proposition of there being decisions, design** and only the "appearance of randomness" destroys atheism and Darwinian evolution. We're left with GOD/God.

Taking your word on everything you have said, the only thing you have proven is that the universe acts similar to a computer. That does not in any way prove that there is some intelligent being out there controlling it.

You can't do that with a designed vs. an undersigned universe because you only have one universe. There is nothing to compare and contrast it to.

Funny how atheshits will say this, then, when they are confronted about the fine-tuning of our universe, will hypothesize that an infinite number of universes exist.
Praesentya
Posts: 195
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 5:10:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer':

Want to cite that? And please not a link to your outrageously incoherent website.

Funny how atheshits will say this, then, when they are confronted about the fine-tuning of our universe, will hypothesize that an infinite number of universes exist.

The 'fine tuning' of our universe can be attributed to the chance nature of existence. Yes, it is possible that in 13.8 billion years (not 7000 years) the universe has characterized itself abiding by the laws of physics.

The fact that there are multiple universes, and according to the multiverse theory - infinite universes - is not hypothetical at all. It's called science.

The benefit of science over religion is that science is based on fact, religion is based on fiction. When science doesn't know something, it readily admits it and continues searching. When religion doesn't know something, it makes up an elaborate explanation and accepts it as reality.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 5:24:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/9/2014 5:10:18 PM, Praesentya wrote:
Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer':

Want to cite that? And please not a link to your outrageously incoherent website.

Funny how atheshits will say this, then, when they are confronted about the fine-tuning of our universe, will hypothesize that an infinite number of universes exist.

The 'fine tuning' of our universe can be attributed to the chance nature of existence. Yes, it is possible that in 13.8 billion years (not 7000 years) the universe has characterized itself abiding by the laws of physics.


It's not possible according to the laws of large numbers, read the wiki page on it.
Praesentya
Posts: 195
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 5:27:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It's not possible according to the laws of large numbers, read the wiki page on it.

Are you referring to this - http://en.wikipedia.org...

That theory is in no way relevant to this argument.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 5:41:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/9/2014 5:27:28 PM, Praesentya wrote:
It's not possible according to the laws of large numbers, read the wiki page on it.

Are you referring to this - http://en.wikipedia.org...

That theory is in no way relevant to this argument.

What argument, and yes it is relevant. Sorry you don't understand maths.
Praesentya
Posts: 195
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 5:49:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
What argument, and yes it is relevant. Sorry you don't understand maths.

In to hear an explanation of it's relevance.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 8:15:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/9/2014 10:37:26 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/6/2014 4:04:20 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:56:35 PM, Brad_Watson.Miami wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:32:51 PM, Envisage wrote::
Please separate euphemisms from the actual descriptions of what things are. Program's presuppose that it was consciously programmed, hence the same description cannot be readily applied to the universe.

Note that the natural laws are descriptive and not proscriptive, including our laws of information conservation, etc.:

Envisage,

Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer': GOD. You didn't argue that. 40 years ago, scientists were saying, "Everything is energy." For the last 10 years, scientists are saying*, "Everything is information."

You are correct, "programs mean there is conscious decisions going on". You want to ignore the real programs because the proposition of there being decisions, design** and only the "appearance of randomness" destroys atheism and Darwinian evolution. We're left with GOD/God.

Taking your word on everything you have said, the only thing you have proven is that the universe acts similar to a computer. That does not in any way prove that there is some intelligent being out there controlling it.

You can't do that with a designed vs. an undersigned universe because you only have one universe. There is nothing to compare and contrast it to.

Funny how atheshits will say this, then, when they are confronted about the fine-tuning of our universe, will hypothesize that an infinite number of universes exist.

Funny how theists love to respond to arguments without reading them.

Please show me where I hypothesized about an infinite number of universes. I'll wait.

And even if I did, so what? You claim that there is a magic man in the sky watching over us. I fail to see how your idea is at the very least, any different.

Now if you had actually paid attention you would realize that my argument was entirely about comparing and contrasting, because that is how we learn about reality. We are able to tell the difference between man made and nature because we can compare things that are man made to nature. It's not that complicated. And since we know the universe is not man made, it is therefore by definition; natural. So on what basis do you claim that nature cannot produce something that is natural? Without being able to compare our universe to an undersigned universe you have none. The idea is noting more than rationalized wishful thinking.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/9/2014 8:59:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/9/2014 8:15:21 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 7/9/2014 10:37:26 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/6/2014 4:04:20 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:56:35 PM, Brad_Watson.Miami wrote:
At 7/2/2014 5:32:51 PM, Envisage wrote::
Please separate euphemisms from the actual descriptions of what things are. Program's presuppose that it was consciously programmed, hence the same description cannot be readily applied to the universe.

Note that the natural laws are descriptive and not proscriptive, including our laws of information conservation, etc.:

Envisage,

Wrong. It's been proven that we are living inside the 'universal quantum computer': GOD. You didn't argue that. 40 years ago, scientists were saying, "Everything is energy." For the last 10 years, scientists are saying*, "Everything is information."

You are correct, "programs mean there is conscious decisions going on". You want to ignore the real programs because the proposition of there being decisions, design** and only the "appearance of randomness" destroys atheism and Darwinian evolution. We're left with GOD/God.

Taking your word on everything you have said, the only thing you have proven is that the universe acts similar to a computer. That does not in any way prove that there is some intelligent being out there controlling it.

You can't do that with a designed vs. an undersigned universe because you only have one universe. There is nothing to compare and contrast it to.

Funny how atheshits will say this, then, when they are confronted about the fine-tuning of our universe, will hypothesize that an infinite number of universes exist.

Funny how theists love to respond to arguments without reading them.

Please show me where I hypothesized about an infinite number of universes. I'll wait.

Funny how your reading comprehension is so bad.

And even if I did, so what? You claim that there is a magic man in the sky watching over us. I fail to see how your idea is at the very least, any different.

Nice strawman attack on theism there.

Now if you had actually paid attention you would realize that my argument was entirely about comparing and contrasting, because that is how we learn about reality. We are able to tell the difference between man made and nature because we can compare things that are man made to nature. It's not that complicated. And since we know the universe is not man made,

Oh really, can you show me what happened before the Big Bang to prove the universe isn't man-made?

it is therefore by definition; natural.

This doesn't follow, it could have been made by aliens for all you know.

So on what basis do you claim that nature cannot produce something that is natural?

Circular logic fallacy. You assume there is nothing above nature, therefore the universe can only be natural, therefore only something natural, therefore only a natural thing could have made the universe come from nothing. Give me a reason why we should assume nothing exist above nature.

Without being able to compare our universe to an undersigned universe you have none. The idea is noting more than rationalized wishful thinking.

Do you even know what wishful thinking is?
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2014 7:41:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/9/2014 8:59:07 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/9/2014 8:15:21 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 7/9/2014 10:37:26 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/6/2014 4:04:20 PM, Double_R wrote:
Taking your word on everything you have said, the only thing you have proven is that the universe acts similar to a computer. That does not in any way prove that there is some intelligent being out there controlling it.

You can't do that with a designed vs. an undersigned universe because you only have one universe. There is nothing to compare and contrast it to.

Funny how atheshits will say this, then, when they are confronted about the fine-tuning of our universe, will hypothesize that an infinite number of universes exist.

Funny how theists love to respond to arguments without reading them.

Please show me where I hypothesized about an infinite number of universes. I'll wait.

Funny how your reading comprehension is so bad.

Funny how you throw insults instead of just showing me where I hypothesized about an infinite number of universes. Still waiting.

And even if I did, so what? You claim that there is a magic man in the sky watching over us. I fail to see how your idea is at the very least, any different.

Nice strawman attack on theism there.

Nice way of dodging the point.

Now if you had actually paid attention you would realize that my argument was entirely about comparing and contrasting, because that is how we learn about reality. We are able to tell the difference between man made and nature because we can compare things that are man made to nature. It's not that complicated. And since we know the universe is not man made,

Oh really, can you show me what happened before the Big Bang to prove the universe isn't man-made?

The universe isn't man made because man came after the universe. This is not hard.

it is therefore by definition; natural.

This doesn't follow, it could have been made by aliens for all you know.

If you want me to exert my energy responding please come back with something more intelligent.

So on what basis do you claim that nature cannot produce something that is natural?

Circular logic fallacy. You assume there is nothing above nature, therefore the universe can only be natural, therefore only something natural, therefore only a natural thing could have made the universe come from nothing. Give me a reason why we should assume nothing exist above nature.

How the hell did you get from my comments about comparing and contrasting to "nothing"? Are you even trying to pay attention?

No one is assuming anything about what lies beyond nature. The entire point is to show how fallacious it is to claim that there is evidence of something beyond nature by looking at what nature does. You (assuming you support the intelligent design arguments) are the one making assumptions. You are assuming nature can't produce order, or intelligence, or complexity in design. My point about comparing and contrasting is to show that you have no basis for doing so. To claim nature can't do that you need to explain to me how you know what nature's limitations are. You can't do that because you do not have another nature to compare it too.

And in case you still don't understand, my argument is not making an assertion about what nature is, it is a rebuttal to your argument about what nature is. Do you understand the difference?
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 4:18:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/2/2014 5:27:07 PM, Brad_Watson.Miami wrote:
GOD: the 'system as a whole'/the 'universal quantum computer'.
The world's leading quantum computer scientists (like Dr. Seth Lloyd of MIT author of Programming the Universe) have discovered that "This universe behaves as a quantum computer where particles not only collide, they compute... Information can be created but not destroyed, although it can be transferred."

Where there's a computer, there are programs.
Where there's programs, there are programmers.
Where there's programmers, there's an original and number 1 programmer...

God incarnate (ET in the Guardin' of Eden, Jesus son of Joseph, 2nd Coming of the Christ): the original and number 1 programmer / the Creator of all true Earth-like plan-its.

Reincarnation being recently proven by science (google that) must also be dismissed by atheists since they don't believe in any afterlife. Yet, I've seen many atheists at least listen to reincarnation data, i.e. the book Soul Survivor. Everyone would like to think that they will carry on somehow after this body dies.

Reincarnation being recently proven by science

Please share a link for this.